restrictions like if you or someone in your house is on crazy pills... you hand over your gun until you're off said crazy pills.

its ludicrous I know...

I know.. It's so silly. They are just taking things they hear in the news and running with it. It.s so funny because the NRA is just loving it. Obama is coming for our guns. Meanwhile over 70% of gun owners agree with what is being proposed.

M16 is the military designation for a specific configuration of the AR15 design (by Armalite). In the same way the M4 is another specific military designation of the AR15 platform (cut down to a 14in barrel).

Primary difference is, as noted, selective fire capability.

As for it "hunting humans"- I'm really indifferent to that. 2nd amendment rights were never intended for sole use in hunting and sports\recreation. Self defense was one of the primary purposes.

And I highly doubt 70% of gun owners agree with his policies. I'd prefer to have a poll from a professional, decidedly objective, source before I go around touting approval statistics as fact.

Obama's gun legislation is nonsense, like Feinstein, but his executive orders are OK as far as objectives go.

well I am not in favor of banning guns. And believe that people should be able to defend themselves. And sure hunt...

I am also in favor people who want a gun proving that they are sane, competent, and have basic training on how to use a tool...

And I believe the prospect of a domestic tyrant coming about far fetched...
And I believe that a foreign tyrant... who presumably has already whooped the military of the current world heavy weight champ... really wouldn't have trouble with cowboys and Halo enthusiasts...

Background checks, and a safety training course is not a bad idea, for gun owners. Unfortunately there is no way to root out all the evildoers from receiving guns, but hopefully, it people are trained, then they can prevent future disasters.

I agree with you all the way up to the last part, are you accusing me of being a Halo enthusiast?

Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.

I know.. It's so silly. They are just taking things they hear in the news and running with it. It.s so funny because the NRA is just loving it. Obama is coming for our guns. Meanwhile over 70% of gun owners agree with what is being proposed.

I explained to you how a single poll conducted in a questionable manner by a questionable organization should not be used a proper evidence to support a claim or set of claims.

Perhaps you were on some crazy pills when you read my response because the message didn't get through.

And seeing the current trend with firearms related purchases and increases in pro 2nd amendment group memberships I'm quite confident that the true reality does not align with those results (or any other results) of the gun control movement.

And if they were "made for hunting down humans" why do police agencies across the USA use them? Last I checked hunting down humans wasn't the role of the police.

Why does the style matter at all? Last I check people are fine with M1 garand's/carbines (the exact weapon used by the US military in the past) and Springfield M1A's (very similar to the M14 used by the military)

Last I checked the 2nd amendment stated "shall not be infringed". Now you can do background checks to deny felons/mentally unstable people (who do not have the same rights as law abiding citizens) the ability to legally purchase firearms but everything else is essentially unconstitutional.

Matrix, you sound silly. You are talking about weapon modification like that makes a difference. If you take a Ford and put a Chevy emblem on it, it doesn't make it a Chevy. An AR15 is just a civilian version of the M-16. They only gave it that name to deprive it of it's military character.

Matrix, you sound silly. You are talking about weapon modification like that makes a difference. If you take a Ford and put a Chevy emblem on it, it doesn't make it a Chevy. An AR15 is just a civilian version of the M-16. They only gave it that name to deprive it of it's military character.

I agree with most of what you're saying, but the designation AR15 came first. It is the successor of the original design, the AR10 ( 7.62 NATO chambering or w\e).

Matrix, you sound silly. You are talking about weapon modification like that makes a difference. If you take a Ford and put a Chevy emblem on it, it doesn't make it a Chevy. An AR15 is just a civilian version of the M-16. They only gave it that name to deprive it of it's military character.

Gun laws differ quite a bit (at the federal level) for select fire weapons compared to standard semi automatic weapons. So it is a significant difference.

I know all about those weapons. They are basically the same. AR 15 was built for the military and the military changed its nomenclature. This whole thing isn't about AR15 or M16. It's about having more responsible gun ownership and this bogey man syndrome that's going around. All this "gov coming to take guns talk" is silly. If the gov wanted to come and take away guns they would of done it already. There is really nothing anyone can do, but it's not the case. Not even close.

I explained to you how a single poll conducted in a questionable manner by a questionable organization should not be used a proper evidence to support a claim or set of claims.

Perhaps you were on some crazy pills when you read my response because the message didn't get through.

And seeing the current trend with firearms related purchases and increases in pro 2nd amendment group memberships I'm quite confident that the true reality does not align with those results (or any other results) of the gun control movement.

propping up a single poll is no different than blindly disregarding it.
I would encourage you to post a recent poll showing that NRA households are not in favor of tighter restrictions on gun sales and safeguards against the menetally ill..

"The results don't align with my personal beliefs so they aren't real"

Originally Posted by -Kwesnoth-

Are you sure you aren't 9 years old? Because the whole "They don't agree with me, so I'll post like a child screaming!!!! " thing is getting old fast.

...not sure where or how you interpreted screaming like a 9 year old...

perhaps a sexual fetish?

By Theft
I am stunned that some people appear to love their Playstation(1,2,3) or Xbox(360) more than I love the Denver Broncos.
Trust me, it's sad

propping up a single poll is no different than blindly disregarding it.
I would encourage you to post a recent poll showing that NRA households are not in favor of tighter restrictions on gun sales and safeguards against the menetally ill..

"The results don't align with my personal beliefs so they aren't real"

...not sure where or how you interpreted screaming like a 9 year old...

perhaps a sexual fetish?

Ok then. I'm off to conduct my own poll (on any subject) and will use it as evidence to support a claim at a later date.

Wait, you wouldn't trust such a poll? Why not, since you are trusting a flawed poll in this case.

Also I highly doubt you would accept a poll on this subject, say from the NRA claiming it was biased.

Sorry but I don't give a single poll on any matter from any institution much validity. You will have to do a lot better than that.

Originally Posted by Sub-stance1

I know all about those weapons. They are basically the same. AR 15 was built for the military and the military changed its nomenclature. This whole thing isn't about AR15 or M16. It's about having more responsible gun ownership and this bogey man syndrome that's going around. All this "gov coming to take guns talk" is silly. If the gov wanted to come and take away guns they would of done it already. There is really nothing anyone can do, but it's not the case. Not even close.

If that were the case then why would you take up a position supporting the proposed AWB? Instead of laws that would promote responsible gun ownership.

Utterly ludicrous. If they were to go door to door they would likely start a civil war. At the very lease there would be a lot of shootings as a result of such actions.

propping up a single poll is no different than blindly disregarding it.I would encourage you to post a recent poll showing that NRA households are not in favor of tighter restrictions on gun sales and safeguards against the menetally ill..

Everything iv'e seen says that they support the restrictions but when you hear NRA reps talk they make it sound like all their guns(and rights) are slowly being taken away.

If that were the case then why would you take up a position supporting the proposed AWB? Instead of laws that would promote responsible gun ownership.

I would support anything if it means that it will keep people safer. Iv'e always believed that certain weapons don't belong in the hands of civilians, but i know some will always sneak through the cracks. Having stricter gun laws isn't gonna set us back. IMO it's been long overdue.

Utterly ludicrous. If they were to go door to door they would likely start a civil war. At the very lease there would be a lot of shootings as a result of such actions.

if the gov wanted to send the military door to door and confiscate weapons they could do that with ease, but that won't happen because they don't want to take away your right to bear arms. But if it ever came to that, I guarantee you the civilians would be on the losing end. You can't out shoot the military. We have more guns and they are much bigger.

I would support anything if it means that it will keep people safer. Iv'e always believed that certain weapons don't belong in the hands of civilians, but i know some will always sneak through the cracks. Having stricter gun laws isn't gonna set us back. IMO it's been long overdue.

if the gov wanted to send the military door to door and confiscate weapons they could do that with ease, but that won't happen because they don't want to take away your right to bear arms. But if it ever came to that, I guarantee you the civilians would be on the losing end. You can't out shoot the military. We have more guns and they are much bigger.

the underlying point being... if the US volunteer military for some reason turns against its own people... we're screwed.

By Theft
I am stunned that some people appear to love their Playstation(1,2,3) or Xbox(360) more than I love the Denver Broncos.
Trust me, it's sad

I would support anything if it means that it will keep people safer. Iv'e always believed that certain weapons don't belong in the hands of civilians, but i know some will always sneak through the cracks. Having stricter gun laws isn't gonna set us back. IMO it's been long overdue.

if the gov wanted to send the military door to door and confiscate weapons they could do that with ease, but that won't happen because they don't want to take away your right to bear arms. But if it ever came to that, I guarantee you the civilians would be on the losing end. You can't out shoot the military. We have more guns and they are much bigger.

It wouldn't set "us" ahead of today. If anything, it will set us back. There isn't any actual evidence or data that banning these weapons will prevent the crimes being done with these weapons. More people are killed with knives than guns. If you narrow it down to death from knives vs death from "assault weapons", then it just digs an even deeper hole for this liberal hogwash.

the underlying point being... if the US volunteer military for some reason turns against its own people... we're screwed.

Pretty much. If it ever came to that.

Originally Posted by Molurus

It wouldn't set "us" ahead of today. If anything, it will set us back. There isn't any actual evidence or data that banning these weapons will prevent the crimes being done with these weapons. More people are killed with knives than guns. If you narrow it down to death from knives vs death from "assault weapons", then it just digs an even deeper hole for this liberal hogwash.

I would support anything if it means that it will keep people safer. Iv'e always believed that certain weapons don't belong in the hands of civilians, but i know some will always sneak through the cracks. Having stricter gun laws isn't gonna set us back. IMO it's been long overdue.

if the gov wanted to send the military door to door and confiscate weapons they could do that with ease, but that won't happen because they don't want to take away your right to bear arms. But if it ever came to that, I guarantee you the civilians would be on the losing end. You can't out shoot the military. We have more guns and they are much bigger.

Anything to keep people safer? That is a pretty poor standard for action.

And you should know that areas with strict gun control tend to have higher crime rates. Taking guns out of the hands of civilians makes us less safe.

Funny how you focus on the weapons that have very little to do with crime and not the ones that do.

Stricter gun laws will set us back. It is guaranteed.

What is long overdue the the revival of common sense and personal responsibility in today's society.

Something that is sorely missing today.

What makes you assume that your fellow peers would even follow such an order? I wouldn't be surprised is a significant amount (possibly a majority) refused to do such a thing. If pushed they may even turn on those would would carry out such an order.

Secondly there are around 2.9 million members of the US armed forces. Assuming all would comply they would be up against ~80 million gun owners. Now the military will have advantages regarding training, communication and logistics but 26 to 1 odds are too much to overcome.

Posting Permissions

PlayStation Universe

Copyright 2006-2014 7578768 Canada Inc. All Right Reserved.

Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written
permission of Abstract Holdings International Ltd. prohibited.Use of this site is governed
by our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.